The Thread Formerly Known As Communism Will Save The World

[Grand Proudhonia]

I like using the Mali example seeing as it literally fostered the richest king to ever exist

I remember him. He was so rich that he travelled to other countries in North Africa and the middle East to show off his wealth

Not only that but he later conquered many of those areas and turned them into trading centers

[Strahcoin]

actually, the incentive to produce will be destroyed, for everyone would be paid equally, anyways. This leads (and has led) to famines, and the state would need to either switch to a more market-based economy (if it wants to stop starving) or install a dictatorship (if it doesn't want to admit it was wrong about communism... again).

I will never tire of explaining this lol

see below

Don't get me wrong, the soviet and chinese systems of planned economies were extremely shit and definitely ran at a loss but the redistribution of land that im referring to results in cooperative farms that operate within a competitive free market systems (I know, it seems like the words "redistribution" and "markets" cant exist together but they can)... The existence of market structures pretty much answers all the downfalls of planned collectivist farms... A good example of these are Israeli Kibbutz and, non agricultural but still, the Mondragon Corporation in Spain... Also I am currently an economics major so your dig doesn't really apply to me, I know how this stuff works to a decent degree.

These cooperatives operating within market systems retain the competitive nature of capitalism which gives people a reason to produce as to create higher wages for all individuals of the cooperative... Also, im literally arguing against the state... I want to abolish it (for the 50th time)

There are roughly 330 million people in the United States alone. If America adopts a communist economic system, an individual produces x value of goods (x being a variable), then he/she will receive more or less an x/330,000,000 increase in wages. Since humans are naturally selfish, and producing consumes the individual's time, energy, and talents, the people will have a >99% chance of losing the incentive of working and therefore refuse to work. The Diner's Dilemma illustrates this sufficiently.

And how will you abolish the state? The state is a natural result of human population growth and innovation. The state is also necessary to protect the people from foreign enemies.

[Rojava Free State]

I will never tire of explaining this lol

see below



These cooperatives operating within market systems retain the competitive nature of capitalism which gives people a reason to produce as to create higher wages for all individuals of the cooperative... Also, im literally arguing against the state... I want to abolish it (for the 50th time)

There are roughly 330 million people in the United States alone. If America adopts a communist economic system, an individual produces x value of goods (x being a variable), then he/she will receive more or less an x/330,000,000 increase in wages. Since humans are naturally selfish, and producing consumes the individual's time, energy, and talents, the people will have a >99% chance of losing the incentive of working and therefore refuse to work. The Diner's Dilemma illustrates this sufficiently.

And how will you abolish the state? The state is a natural result of human population growth and innovation. The state is also necessary to protect the people from foreign enemies.

The state is necessary in a world full of states. It is not necessary in a world without them and for most of human history there was no state.

There's several anarchist societies that exist right now such as in oaxaca, Barbacha, and Rojava. Anarchism could work under certain conditions although I'm still not totally sure if it could work right now or not. The biggest government I want is a libertarian one and that's the only thing I know for certain

[Grand Proudhonia]

I will never tire of explaining this lol

see below



These cooperatives operating within market systems retain the competitive nature of capitalism which gives people a reason to produce as to create higher wages for all individuals of the cooperative... Also, im literally arguing against the state... I want to abolish it (for the 50th time)

There are roughly 330 million people in the United States alone. If America adopts a communist economic system, an individual produces x value of goods (x being a variable), then he/she will receive more or less an x/330,000,000 increase in wages. Since humans are naturally selfish, and producing consumes the individual's time, energy, and talents, the people will have a >99% chance of losing the incentive of working and therefore refuse to work. The Diner's Dilemma illustrates this sufficiently.

And how will you abolish the state? The state is a natural result of human population growth and innovation. The state is also necessary to protect the people from foreign enemies.

I'm not arguing for a communist system, I'm arguing for the redistribution of wealth (within the worker cooperative an individual works within) and the redistribution of land on a use occupation basis... Also your math makes literally zero sense and hardly explains the truth about anything... Again, Jesus christ, humans are not anything by nature

Regarding the abolishment of the state, I dont know... Their are many theories as to how political anarchists can bring about such a massive social change... I have yet to subscribe to one form or another but thats what research is for


In regards to military, you can have a military without the existence of a state... For an example of that, I point you towards The Free Territory of Ukriane and Mahknos Insurgency against the White Army and later Red Army

[Torrocca]

I will never tire of explaining this lol

see below



These cooperatives operating within market systems retain the competitive nature of capitalism which gives people a reason to produce as to create higher wages for all individuals of the cooperative... Also, im literally arguing against the state... I want to abolish it (for the 50th time)

There are roughly 330 million people in the United States alone. If America adopts a communist economic system, an individual produces x value of goods (x being a variable), then he/she will receive more or less an x/330,000,000 increase in wages. Since humans are naturally selfish, and producing consumes the individual's time, energy, and talents, the people will have a >99% chance of losing the incentive of working and therefore refuse to work. The Diner's Dilemma illustrates this sufficiently.

And how will you abolish the state? The state is a natural result of human population growth and innovation. The state is also necessary to protect the people from foreign enemies.

Humans are so naturally selfish that they naturally formed societies filled to the brim with natural cooperation.

[Eastern Aestorusia]

Please don't judge too harshly

Actually, I DON'T CARE! Just get it over with uwu owo

[Empire of Asgadr]

Western Imperialism sure has helped Africa amirite?

Well, there was the establishment of industrialization, education, and the reduction of slavery...

As I have said, Western Imperialism is far from perfect (I am well aware of the Philippine-American War), but to imply that it is outright immoral is to imply that the expansion of the American ideals of liberty and markets does no good for the people.

If you thought Iran was communist, you quite frankly don't know enough to comment on this in any credible fashion.

Ad hominem.

Yep. Under capitalism, surpluses of goods are bad because they lower demand and therefore the price of sale.

While it's true that a monopoly or big corporation may reduce the supply of its goods (or give the illusion of such) to raise demand and therefore prices, a free-market capitalist economy (which I support) will increase the chances of competing businesses (with lower prices) being opened when such causes the dissatisfaction of the consumers. When there are sufficient competitors, it would be in the interest of the businesses to increase supply and innovate new products.

A better solution is social democracy which is political, social and economic philosophy that supports economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a liberal democratic polity and a capitalist mixed economy. Which is in fact so much better than communism.

While a social democracy would be better than a communist state (Norway and Sweden are still doing okay, especially when compared to the Soviet Union/Communist China/Cuba/Venezuela), it would be inferior to a free-market capitalist nation (the United States of America is doing better in innovation, military strength, healthcare, etc.).

Redistribution of land and wealth doesn't work like that.... Soon after land and wealth is divided, the production of new wealth and products will begin but now in the hands of the many instead of the hands of the few....

Actually, the incentive to produce will be destroyed, for everyone would be paid equally, anyways. This leads (and has led) to famines, and the state would need to either switch to a more market-based economy (if it wants to stop starving) or install a dictatorship (if it doesn't want to admit it was wrong about communism... again).

It is pretty far fetched to claim that the US has superior healthcare to that of the Nordics

[Kubra]

I mean they've stricken socialism from the constitution, not to mention embracing heretical doctrines like idealism

And, you know, basically being a hereditary monarchy.

Oh yeah that too
but more importantly, *kantianism*! The scandal!

[Audioslavia]

I found you

Sage pls

[Kubra]

I like using the Mali example seeing as it literally fostered the richest king to ever exist

I remember him. He was so rich that he travelled to other countries in North Africa and the middle East to show off his wealth

if you got it flaunt it

[Kubra]

I imagine most advocates for global socialism and communism would point to the average American lifestyle as the reason many of those nations have poor standards of living. The deliberate exploitation of other nations is why it seems to be thriving so much in the US.

I can't necessarily disagree. But I can't say I care.

"Western Imperialism" has actually lifted people in other nations out of poverty, even though it may have some flaws. That's why Hong Kong became relatively wealthy compared to the rest of China when the British colonized it.

Hong Kong was a trade port with a city attached. In previous centuries being a trade hub was how a city good rich.

[Scherzinger]

65 million people died from the direct effects Communism. Whether it be from policies, wars, or you run of the line assassination. Guess its hot stuff for the kids who havent seen a history book yet, so naturally, killing more people would surely save the world. Take it from a guy who spent 3 years as a communist it's only enjoyable when you are the one with all the power. The moment you lose that power, you hate the system you claimed was so great.

At least capitalism rewards those who are motivated to make a life for themselves.

Communism believes that because you have a pulse you are entitled to a share of the labour you didnt earn. Meaning you can sit on your arse and do drugs, and you will receive the same amount of money that a person who worked 15 hours a day so you can make that money. Communism punishes the lazy and slaughters the daring. If you die in communism, it is 9 times out of 10 a direct cause of a communist aspect. You either die because you starve to death (policy), you fall in battle (revolt/war) or you are killed in cold blood (assassination)

Capitalism believes that the only way is up, as long as you are motivated to do so. Capitalism rewards the daring and punishes the lazy, which is a much better system. If you die under capitalism, it will be because of you, not the system,

Im not worried about another Red Scare, because it didnt work the first time. Also, Communists do not practice what they preach. Commies will tell you to distribute your profits, but can not will themselves to do it. This is a textbook version of "Do as i say, not as i do."

Unfortunately, the chances that a commie will actually read this and have a civil discussion is like asking a World of Tanks player to stop gold spamming. Its never gonna happen and you end up more frustrated than you were when you started.

Communism is only good for the person in power, not the people it claims to give the power (political or financial) to.

The title of this forum post is by far the biggest Oxymoron i have ever seen in my entire life.

[Kowani]

65 million people died from the direct effects Communism.

Citation needed.

Take it from a guy who spent 3 years as a communist it's only enjoyable when you are the one with all the power. The moment you lose that power, you hate the system you claimed was so great.

Yes, that’s how the human psyche tends to work.

At least capitalism rewards those who are motivated to make a life for themselves.

This is what we call blatant lies.

Communism believes that because you have a pulse you are entitled to a share of the labour you didnt earn.

No, actually. It believes that the workers-you know, the actual laborers-should own the means of production.

Meaning you can sit on your arse and do drugs, and you will receive the same amount of money that a person who worked 15 hours a day so you can make that money.

Communism also advocates abolishing money. So…

Communism punishes the lazy and slaughters the daring.

No, that’s capitalism.

If you die in communism, it is 9 times out of 10 a direct cause of a communist aspect.

Citation needed.

You either die because you starve to death (policy), you fall in battle (revolt/war) or you are killed in cold blood (assassination)

All of these things happen under capitalism as well.

Capitalism believes that the only way is up, as long as you are motivated to do so. Capitalism rewards the daring and punishes the lazy, which is a much better system. If you die under capitalism, it will be because of you, not the system,

Literally none of this is true.

Im not worried about another Red Scare, because it didnt work the first time. Also, Communists do not practice what they preach. Commies will tell you to distribute your profits, but can not will themselves to do it. This is a textbook version of "Do as i say, not as i do."

I’m sure you have examples for this blanket statement.

Unfortunately, the chances that a commie will actually read this and have a civil discussion is like asking a World of Tanks player to stop gold spamming. Its never gonna happen and you end up more frustrated than you were when you started.

You throwing around ad hominems doesn’t help that.

The title of this forum post is by far the biggest Oxymoron i have ever seen in my entire life.

I got a bigger one: Human Centric Capitalism.

[Neko-koku]

I was thinking Ethiopia

I like using the Mali example seeing as it literally fostered the richest king to ever exist.... Europeans aint got shit on Musa The First

By having a lot of gold under their territory? Yeah that's like Equatorial Guinea..

[Duhon]

Lemme counter the above assertion with my own assertion: No.

[Kowani]

I like using the Mali example seeing as it literally fostered the richest king to ever exist.... Europeans aint got shit on Musa The First

By having a lot of gold under their territory? Yeah that's like Equatorial Guinea..

That wasn’t the only reason, but continue in your ignorance.

[Torrocca]

65 million people died from the direct effects Communism. Whether it be from policies, wars, or you run of the line assassination. Guess its hot stuff for the kids who havent seen a history book yet, so naturally, killing more people would surely save the world. Take it from a guy who spent 3 years as a communist it's only enjoyable when you are the one with all the power. The moment you lose that power, you hate the system you claimed was so great.

At least capitalism rewards those who are motivated to make a life for themselves.

Communism believes that because you have a pulse you are entitled to a share of the labour you didnt earn. Meaning you can sit on your arse and do drugs, and you will receive the same amount of money that a person who worked 15 hours a day so you can make that money. Communism punishes the lazy and slaughters the daring. If you die in communism, it is 9 times out of 10 a direct cause of a communist aspect. You either die because you starve to death (policy), you fall in battle (revolt/war) or you are killed in cold blood (assassination)

Capitalism believes that the only way is up, as long as you are motivated to do so. Capitalism rewards the daring and punishes the lazy, which is a much better system. If you die under capitalism, it will be because of you, not the system,

Im not worried about another Red Scare, because it didnt work the first time. Also, Communists do not practice what they preach. Commies will tell you to distribute your profits, but can not will themselves to do it. This is a textbook version of "Do as i say, not as i do."

Unfortunately, the chances that a commie will actually read this and have a civil discussion is like asking a World of Tanks player to stop gold spamming. Its never gonna happen and you end up more frustrated than you were when you started.

Communism is only good for the person in power, not the people it claims to give the power (political or financial) to.

The title of this forum post is by far the biggest Oxymoron i have ever seen in my entire life.

Given your stellar, derogatory use of "commie" toward Communists (as well as pretty much all of your pro/anti shit in your signature), I'm gonna have to doubt your claims that you used to be a Communist. That's of course not even touching on the actual contents of your post which make it abundantly clear you were never actually a Communist nor actually have any idea whatsoever what Communism is.

[Jack Thomas Lang]

Given your stellar, derogatory use of "commie" toward Communists (as well as pretty much all of your pro/anti shit in your signature), I'm gonna have to doubt your claims that you used to be a Communist. That's of course not even touching on the actual contents of your post which make it abundantly clear you were never actually a Communist nor actually have any idea whatsoever what Communism is.

Why? Literal actual fascists (a whole fucking pile of them) were communists. Even in Australia, we had our fair share of the commie-to-fascist pipeline.

[Torrocca]

Given your stellar, derogatory use of "commie" toward Communists (as well as pretty much all of your pro/anti shit in your signature), I'm gonna have to doubt your claims that you used to be a Communist. That's of course not even touching on the actual contents of your post which make it abundantly clear you were never actually a Communist nor actually have any idea whatsoever what Communism is.

Why? Literal actual fascists (a whole fucking pile of them) were communists. Even in Australia, we had our fair share of the commie-to-fascist pipeline.

Maybe it's just me putting a twinge too much faith into such people, but I'd assume somebody who claims to have been Communist for three years would, at the very least, understand the most basic dictionary definition of Communism.

[Nakena]

65 million people died from the direct effects Communism. Whether it be from policies, wars, or you run of the line assassination. Guess its hot stuff for the kids who havent seen a history book yet, so naturally, killing more people would surely save the world. Take it from a guy who spent 3 years as a communist it's only enjoyable when you are the one with all the power. The moment you lose that power, you hate the system you claimed was so great.

At least capitalism rewards those who are motivated to make a life for themselves.

Communism believes that because you have a pulse you are entitled to a share of the labour you didnt earn. Meaning you can sit on your arse and do drugs, and you will receive the same amount of money that a person who worked 15 hours a day so you can make that money. Communism punishes the lazy and slaughters the daring. If you die in communism, it is 9 times out of 10 a direct cause of a communist aspect. You either die because you starve to death (policy), you fall in battle (revolt/war) or you are killed in cold blood (assassination)

Capitalism believes that the only way is up, as long as you are motivated to do so. Capitalism rewards the daring and punishes the lazy, which is a much better system. If you die under capitalism, it will be because of you, not the system,

Im not worried about another Red Scare, because it didnt work the first time. Also, Communists do not practice what they preach. Commies will tell you to distribute your profits, but can not will themselves to do it. This is a textbook version of "Do as i say, not as i do."

Unfortunately, the chances that a commie will actually read this and have a civil discussion is like asking a World of Tanks player to stop gold spamming. Its never gonna happen and you end up more frustrated than you were when you started.

Communism is only good for the person in power, not the people it claims to give the power (political or financial) to.

The title of this forum post is by far the biggest Oxymoron i have ever seen in my entire life.

Given your stellar, derogatory use of "commie" toward Communists (as well as pretty much all of your pro/anti shit in your signature), I'm gonna have to doubt your claims that you used to be a Communist. That's of course not even touching on the actual contents of your post which make it abundantly clear you were never actually a Communist nor actually have any idea whatsoever what Communism is.

Replace the word "communism" with bolshevism and the problem is fixed. :^)

[Freaneet]

deleted

[Jack Thomas Lang]

It appears no-one took my advice, now we're on a tangent about commie-fascists. The two are not the same, they are in no way similar.

Maybe so, although that doesn't disprove the existence of the commie-to-fascist pipeline. Perhaps not nowadays, but it certainly existed back in the 30s.

[Nogodia]

Obligatory Insult:
Half the ideas in this thread suck not just balls, but such a degree of shaft that oil rig designers are lurking for design inspiration.

Serious point to be made:
Communism is flawed and hasn't worked in the past. A truly functioning communist society that comes to fruitation is an outlier and an incredible flip-off to current economic trends. Frankly, if someone can pull it off, I'll be interested in seeing it grow. And by someone, I'm referring to a person who isn't the OP. Anyone who says "here's why this ideology is the best" will inevitably make a terrible leader prone to a lack to flexibility and adaptation, combined with disappointment and tyranny when their "perfect plan" doesn't go exactly as they dreamt it would.

[Audioslavia]

I found you

(Image)

Sage pls

Don't Spam

[Czechoslovakia and Zakarpatia]

It appears no-one took my advice, now we're on a tangent about commie-fascists. The two are not the same, they are in no way similar.

Maybe so, although that doesn't disprove the existence of the commie-to-fascist pipeline. Perhaps not nowadays, but it certainly existed back in the 30s.

Communism isn't exactly compatible with the notions of "traditional values", and fascism is a response to that. Heavy economic interventionism combined with a emphasis on religion, hardcore reactionarism, rollback of democracy and modernism, and heavy irredentism.